If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

View Poll Results: What to do about the 'Is Shaolin-Do for real?' thread

Voters

57. You may not vote on this poll

Unlock IS-Dfr. Merge all S-D threads together so it clears 1000 posts!

Why don't we just say, once and for all, that SD and CSC teach a kuntao style from Indonesia, which has its roots in the styles taught by Chinese immigrants to Bandung in Western Java.
It looks different and has different methods from mainland and Taiwan Chinese styles because it was geographically seperated, and influenced by elements of the local styles and culture, as well as blending elements of several Chinese styles which were taught together instead of as seperate disciplines.
Compound this with inadequate or hasty instruction for a large number of students, some of whom go on to become instructors themselves, and you end up with something that just looks like a mess. But there are elements of the system which are worthwhile, even if it isn't a "pure" Chinese martial art.
If one were to take a step back, ensure solid training of fundamentals, and re-focus the curriculum on a core set of forms (not trying to teach over a hundred of them in the course of a few short years), that system would produce more solid martial artists who could be proud of their style and their skills.
If we tell the truth, as best we know it, about the origins of the style and the forms, it will lead to fewer questions down the road. Myths and legends are still fun stories to tell, but don't let students confuse them for factual occurrences.

I say, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a core of a good style here, if the focus could just be shifted.

Perfect summation of this thread. If only the elders of SD would agree to see it this way.

Originally Posted by Oso

AND, yea, a good bit of it is about whether you can fight with what you know...kinda all of it is about that.

Why don't we just say, once and for all, that SD and CSC teach a kuntao style from Indonesia, which has its roots in the styles taught by Chinese immigrants to Bandung in Western Java.
It looks different and has different methods from mainland and Taiwan Chinese styles because it was geographically seperated, and influenced by elements of the local styles and culture, as well as blending elements of several Chinese styles which were taught together instead of as seperate disciplines.
Compound this with inadequate or hasty instruction for a large number of students, some of whom go on to become instructors themselves, and you end up with something that just looks like a mess. But there are elements of the system which are worthwhile, even if it isn't a "pure" Chinese martial art.
If one were to take a step back, ensure solid training of fundamentals, and re-focus the curriculum on a core set of forms (not trying to teach over a hundred of them in the course of a few short years), that system would produce more solid martial artists who could be proud of their style and their skills.
If we tell the truth, as best we know it, about the origins of the style and the forms, it will lead to fewer questions down the road. Myths and legends are still fun stories to tell, but don't let students confuse them for factual occurrences.

I say, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a core of a good style here, if the focus could just be shifted.

I agree as well. There are effective techniques and good fighters among the SD bunch. I think it is the claim that they are teaching Shaolin Kung Fu that is what rubs everyone the wrong way. I bought all of that crap hook, line and sinker when I was with them too. But I always thought the legends that were told sounded a little Shaw Brothers. After I left and started training with my current Master and going to CMA tournaments I got a great exposure to what CMA is out there, both southern and northern, internal and external. SD did not even slightly resemble any of it. I think they would be better off to drop the Shaolin and call themselves an Indonesian Art.

I agree as well. There are effective techniques and good fighters among the SD bunch. I think it is the claim that they are teaching Shaolin Kung Fu that is what rubs everyone the wrong way. I bought all of that crap hook, line and sinker when I was with them too. But I always thought the legends that were told sounded a little Shaw Brothers. After I left and started training with my current Master and going to CMA tournaments I got a great exposure to what CMA is out there, both southern and northern, internal and external. SD did not even slightly resemble any of it. I think they would be better off to drop the Shaolin and call themselves an Indonesian Art.

Once again ...didnt even slightly resemble any of it....???

What seems to be the problem with calling it Shaolin ??

Its just a name.

a label

BFD

You can call it "Dog $h!t on my lawn" for all I care

Its people that have this attitude, that think they know what shaolin is and what it is not that really turn me off from spending anytime with other CMA artists.

F#king elitists

...I know what the flavor of CMA is, I know what it is "supposed "to look like but I have to say that most of the CMA that I have seen is completely useless in a real fight.

It may look pretty, but F#cking useless!

SD is a branch of a large tree that because of its migration and geographical location took on a different form.

What is everyones problem with that???

I do not call it Kung Fu or Karate ... Its just Shaolin Martial Arts everyone has this big issue with it being called kung fu or Karate ....... once again another F#CKING label.

Next you will be saying that because the Vietnamese, Japanese, etc. versions of Shaolin are not done the same wayyou think they should be done that they are not shaolin either ,right??

Get over yourself.....Shut up and go train!!

Yeah , lets just drop a name that has been used for over how many years just to satisfy all of you!!! Oy Vey

Why don't we just say, once and for all, that SD and CSC teach a kuntao style from Indonesia, which has its roots in the styles taught by Chinese immigrants to Bandung in Western Java.
It looks different and has different methods from mainland and Taiwan Chinese styles because it was geographically seperated, and influenced by elements of the local styles and culture, as well as blending elements of several Chinese styles which were taught together instead of as seperate disciplines.
Compound this with inadequate or hasty instruction for a large number of students, some of whom go on to become instructors themselves, and you end up with something that just looks like a mess. But there are elements of the system which are worthwhile, even if it isn't a "pure" Chinese martial art.
If one were to take a step back, ensure solid training of fundamentals, and re-focus the curriculum on a core set of forms (not trying to teach over a hundred of them in the course of a few short years), that system would produce more solid martial artists who could be proud of their style and their skills.
If we tell the truth, as best we know it, about the origins of the style and the forms, it will lead to fewer questions down the road. Myths and legends are still fun stories to tell, but don't let students confuse them for factual occurrences.

I say, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a core of a good style here, if the focus could just be shifted.

Great post , I am right here with you , brother. Now do you have any problem with using the name " Shaolin"???

interesting that you say that. as it brings up a very important point about shaolin do. there are many variations of it(even here in atlanta among people who learned side by side)... the 2 forms you commented on are what i was taught by gary grooms and are what i taught at the csc in atlanta.

Seeing as Yang came from Chen , to me, it stands to reason that there would be some over lap.
from what I understand MGG is an excellent Tai Chi player and knows whats what.

I do have to admit because most people do not spend the time to really study learn and practice the material it all looks the same .

Your tiger should not look like preying mantis and your Hua should not look like whatever....

Bruce , I like what you are doing . It is amazing how far you have come in a short period of time ...THats real KUNG FU!!!

Yeah ... so what???

I am on one today... I had this guy watch me train yesterday and he said to me, " I like your style, what martial art style is that" I told him that it was CMA . He said "it cant be because you wearing a GI , a Japanese uniform.......

SD did not even slightly resemble any of it. I think they would be better off to drop the Shaolin and call themselves an Indonesian Art.

but just a few posts ago you said that video looked like yang tai chi and chen tai chi. that is what i was taught in sd ... you seem to be saying 2 different things adn one of them seems to be an absolute that is simply incorrect. i think what you really mean is that among the sd group some of them really suck.

best,

bruce

Happy indeed we live,
friendly amidst the hostile.
Amidst hostile men
we dwell free from hatred.

I have no problem calling it shaolin-do because kung tao is an Indonesian blending of CMA with other arts. It's origin is Chinese but it is now something somewhat different. Shorin ryu's name is very similar but it is not shaolin anymore although it claims to once have been.

Originally Posted by Oso

AND, yea, a good bit of it is about whether you can fight with what you know...kinda all of it is about that.

however, to claim something is 'shaolin' is different than claiming something is 'shaolin martial art'

two different things

i cant remember what video, i think it was shi deyang that said something along the lines of: (Not direct quote, but same message)

the essence of shaolin martial art is adaption and evolution. if you take your shaolin martial art to another region and give the material to the people there, after time you will see a change take place in the material you taught. the shaolin martial art is going to resemble and blend with the local boxing methods. the shaolin methods will be an addition to what is currently being done in that region.

after all, shaolin martial arts is a massive blend of material worked and worked and worked for generations in a 'melting pot' so to speak.

this is really just a truth of martial arts and cross training. also the easy explination why karate and kungfu are similar yet distinctly different. the Japanese made the art their own.

however, to claim something is 'shaolin' is different than claiming something is 'shaolin martial art'

two different things

i cant remember what video, i think it was shi deyang that said something along the lines of: (Not direct quote, but same message)

the essence of shaolin martial art is adaption and evolution. if you take your shaolin martial art to another region and give the material to the people there, after time you will see a change take place in the material you taught. the shaolin martial art is going to resemble and blend with the local boxing methods. the shaolin methods will be an addition to what is currently being done in that region.

after all, shaolin martial arts is a massive blend of material worked and worked and worked for generations in a 'melting pot' so to speak.

this is really just a truth of martial arts and cross training. also the easy explination why karate and kungfu are similar yet distinctly different. the Japanese made the art their own.

from what I understand MGG is an excellent Tai Chi player and knows whats what.

i really think gary grooms is a good tai chi chuan teacher. i have learned a lot from him. i have had difference of opinion about hsing i with him but he was and is open to change and other ideas as long as you are not just parroting what you read in a book or what ever. as long as you are speaking to him from personal and practical knowledge he will listen and respect what ever you have to say even if he does not agree.

Originally Posted by tattooedmonk

Bruce , I like what you are doing . It is amazing how far you have come in a short period of time ...THats real KUNG FU!!!

thank you. lots of fun and hard work. and **** one of the biggest things i have learned in recent years is just when you think "i know this" you find out there is even more to learn and understand.

best,

bruce

Happy indeed we live,
friendly amidst the hostile.
Amidst hostile men
we dwell free from hatred.

Exactly, everyone thinks their style is the one and only "true" shaolin style. No doubt Sin The's teachers beleived this, too, when they left China, and he still believes it now.
I don't have a problem using the name Shaolin, because so many different styles do already. They have shaolin style in Vietnam, they use the Vietnamese word for it, thieu lam. Shorin is the Japanese pronounciation of Shaolin used to describe an Okinawan style. We all know that many, many styles describe themselves as shaolin, and almost none of them teach or follow a strict Buddhist philosophy as temple monks do, and most don't look anything like what is taught in the temple now. What has to stop is saying "the one and only authentic shaolin martial art, taught by the one true shaolin grand master". That's ridiculous.
Of course, the internal arts aren't "shaolin" by anyone's definition, and they're a part of the system as well (though it is probable that taijiquan has its origins in shaolin longfist). To heck with it, it's just a name. Maybe the internal arts weren't developed or practiced at the shaolin temple, but they're a part of this kuntao style, which was apparently called "shaolin" in Indonesia.
Whatever people call it, I just think that the fact that the art has come through Indonesia, and changed there, shouldn't be passed over like a footnote. It's the identity of the style, whether Sin The wants to deny it or not. It's something to be proud of, not hidden. Of course, to someone who's ethnic heritage was persecuted in Indonesia, being from Indonesia may not be something to be proud of. I can see why they may not want to give their home country any credit, or identify themselves or their style as Indonesian. But regardless of family and ethnic pride, it's the truth.

Indonesian Shaolin kung fu? Shaolin kuntao? Shaolin tao? Sin The's butt kickin' kentucky karotty? I don't really care so long as we tell the truth about where it comes from. and keep the training "real".

"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun! Go back to the shadow, you cannot pass!"